hippo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Well Charlie Wijeratna was brought in, in February. Maybe this was with a view to eventually making Fox chairman. Although I suspect nothing will change really save for his job title. Is the CEO not the guy who runs the club? Is the chairman not the face of the club? Just wondering would fox not be better staying in his current role as it is more important? Yes Im sure he would be thrilled at having someone promoted over his head. What has Tom Fox actually done at Aston Villa thats so great anyway ? he had no option to but to sack Lambert then recuited the easiest available option, hardly a great visionary is he ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
islingtonclaret Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Well Charlie Wijeratna was brought in, in February. Maybe this was with a view to eventually making Fox chairman. Although I suspect nothing will change really save for his job title. Is the CEO not the guy who runs the club? Is the chairman not the face of the club? Just wondering would fox not be better staying in his current role as it is more important? Yes Im sure he would be thrilled at having someone promoted over his head. What has Tom Fox actually done at Aston Villa thats so great anyway ? he had no option to but to sack Lambert then recuited the easiest available option, hardly a great visionary is he ? Paul Faulkner appointed Alex McLeish Tom Fox sacked Lambert and brought in Sherwood. Hardly a visionary, but at least someone doing something at this club for once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jareth Posted May 27, 2015 VT Supporter Share Posted May 27, 2015 So, straight form the horses mouth - we know there are two serious parties looking at us. Sadly they are probably also looking at West Brom. I wonder why they even have to do that? Aren't we just automatically better in every way? Very welcome statement from Randy, good on him. Like WBA he is flushing out serious bidders with his statement about restructuring the board - we should see some movement now one way or the other. I must have missed this?! I've just quickly read over the article again and can not see what you are referring too in terms of two serious parties?! There seems to be three sources of info - one published article by the times with the most detail, an online article by The Times with less detail and then 2 tweets from the journo behind both articles, from the times. All of this info is based on an interview with our beloved owner so as sources of information go I think we now know a great deal more than we did yesterday. I actually think Randy has been honest in his previous statements and is doing so again now. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. If Faulkner was still here we'd have been relegated and Lambert would still have a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. You're joking with that right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villa4europe Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 It's not so much sacking lambert and bringing in sherwood, it's next month when the dafabet deal ends we'll get to see if fox can work his magic, to be fair to Faulkner he had us punching above our weight I'm expecting fox to do even more Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dudevillaisnice Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 (edited) The first bit I posted yesterday was a different article which came out last night, today The Times have updated the front page and as such have also seperated the takeover issue too. This article gives more information on the takeover itself. Same as the back page really, confirms Germans, Italians, Americans and Chinese are amoung the few to register their interest. Randy Lerner will step down as Aston Villa chairman this summer even if he retains ownership of the club. The American still hopes to sell Villa but has already made moves to put a new board in place if no takeover is completed. In a rare interview, Lerner told The Times, that he accepts he should have stepped aside several years ago because of work and family commitments in the United States. He has come under fire from supporters as the team has battled relegation in recent seasons. “I don’t disagree with the criticism,” he said. “And what I should have done several years back was bring in a chairman.” He insists that he has already taken steps to help to revive the Midlands club, who hope to win their first trophy in almost 20 years by beating Arsenal in the FA Cup final on Saturday. Victory would provide an upbeat end to another difficult season, as well as a place in the Europa League, and Lerner believes that the retention of top-flight status could accelerate the sale of the club he bought from Doug Ellis in 2006. Talks are continuing with several parties, including groups backed from China and the United States, although reports that a consortium — led by Paul Smith, the former Chelsea chief executive, and Tony Adams — is close to completing a deal are understood to be wide of the mark. “Yes, the club remains for sale,” Lerner said. “But as we’ve seen, ‘Club for sale’ doesn’t necessarily mean it will change hands so fast.” Lerner could have sold Villa last year but was not happy with the way that the deal was progressing so pulled out of negotiations. He insists that he will not sell unless he is happy with both the offer — saying that recent sales in the Premier League “suggest somewhere in the £150 million to £200 million [region] is the likely range” — and the commitments of the new owners. “I have had interest from nearly every corner of the globe,” he said. “Germans, Italians, Americans and Chinese among others have expressed interest in and fondness for the Villa. The key of course is to try to put the club in custodial hands that can take the club forward - resources and competence and a willingness to immerse themselves in the local fabric.” Lerner says that if no party can complete a swift takeover, and he may set a time limit to ensure readiness for next season, he will stay on as owner but will appoint a new chairman. There could also be other additions to the board. “Last year at this time I had a plan A, which was to sell, and a plan B, which was to rethink the club’s business management, which led to the hiring of Tom Fox [as chief executive],” Lerner said. “This year plan A remains to find a buyer if on the cards or, plan B, find a new chairman.” http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/sport/football/clubs/astonvilla/article4452355.ece Edited May 27, 2015 by dudevillaisnice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 We really need to get rid of this guy this summer. A bit late to tell us you should have sold up years ago. It's been clear for years he'd lost interest in us and that there was no other plan than keep costs low and stay in the league. Terrible owner. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 It's not so much sacking lambert and bringing in sherwood, it's next month when the dafabet deal ends we'll get to see if fox can work his magic, to be fair to Faulkner he had us punching above our weight I'm expecting fox to do even more Thats the key word 'Expecting' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. You're joking with that right? Why would I be joking? Giving the job to Sherwood wasn't such an amazing out the box decision that Faulkner wouldn't have possibly have thought of it, it was the most obvious move to make. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENTLEMAN Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. You're joking with that right? Why would I be joking? Giving the job to Sherwood wasn't such an amazing out the box decision that Faulkner wouldn't have possibly have thought of it, it was the most obvious move to make. I wouldn't say it was obvious, I thought it was a big risk to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YGabbana Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Not claiming to be ITK but my mate works close to VP and has seen a group of chinese businessmen going in twice this week, the same group Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. You're joking with that right? Why would I be joking? Giving the job to Sherwood wasn't such an amazing out the box decision that Faulkner wouldn't have possibly have thought of it, it was the most obvious move to make. Nah, only super guru Tom Fox knew of Sherwood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sexbelowsound Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. You're joking with that right? Why would I be joking? Giving the job to Sherwood wasn't such an amazing out the box decision that Faulkner wouldn't have possibly have thought of it, it was the most obvious move to make. Faulkner struck me as someone who wouldn't take the risk of employing Sherwood and would have gone for a steady hand like Pulis or keep Lambert. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
useless Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 One thing I will say, I doubt Fox would have ever have given a job to Mcleish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 One thing I will say, I doubt Fox would have ever have given a job to Mcleish. 99% of the footballing world wouldn't have chosen Mcleish as AVFC manager. Im not against Tom Fox, but as of now I don't get what he has done at Villa, that he is held in such high regard. If were giving him credit for Sherwood, then the CEO's of Sunderland, Crystal Palace, WBA must absolute genuises ..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YGabbana Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 One thing I will say, I doubt Fox would have ever have given a job to Mcleish. 99% of the footballing world wouldn't have chosen Mcleish as AVFC manager. Im not against Tom Fox, but as of now I don't get what he has done at Villa, that he is held in such high regard. If were giving him credit for Sherwood, then the CEO's of Sunderland, Crystal Palace, WBA must absolute genuises ..... Uwotm8 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dounavilla Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 Not claiming to be ITK but my mate works close to VP and has seen a group of chinese businessmen going in twice this week, the same group That's just the delevery of lunch from the "Cream of Sum Yung Guy" restaraunt. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted May 27, 2015 Share Posted May 27, 2015 If Faulkner was still here instead of Fox, he'd have probably appointed Sherwood as well. You're joking with that right? Why would I be joking? Giving the job to Sherwood wasn't such an amazing out the box decision that Faulkner wouldn't have possibly have thought of it, it was the most obvious move to make. Nah, only super guru Tom Fox knew of Sherwood Unlike QPR and west brom he saw something in him and more importantly, knew Lambert had to go. That's something that I doubt Faulkner would have decided in time to save us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts